European Planning Studies

ISSN: 0965-4313 (Print) 1469-5944 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ceps20

Open innovation ecosystems of restaurants:

geographical economics of successful restaurants
from three cities

JinHyo Joseph Yun, KyungBae Park, Giovanna Del Gaudio & Valentina Della
Corte

To cite this article: JinHyo Joseph Yun, KyungBae Park, Giovanna Del Gaudio & Valentina Della
Corte (2020): Open innovation ecosystems of restaurants: geographical economics of successful
restaurants from three cities, European Planning Studies, DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2020.1721438

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1721438

View supplementary material

Published online: 06 Feb 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 19

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ceps20
EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES
https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1721438

Open innovation ecosystems of restaurants: geographical

economics of successful restaurants from three cities
JinHyo Joseph Yuna, KyungBae Parkb, Giovanna Del Gaudioc and Valentina
Della Cortec
a
DGIST, Daegu, South Korea; bSangJi University, Wonju, South Korea; cUniversity of Naples Federico II, Napoli,
Italy

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This paper investigates the role of open innovation in the success of Received 4 October 2019
restaurants. Our research questions are as follows. ‘Is open Revised 12 January 2020
innovation a rational strategy for a small restaurant to attract and Accepted 16 January 2020
maintain customers? Which open innovation strategies should a
KEYWORDS
small restaurant use?’ We constructed our research model of open open innovation ecosystem;
innovation ecosystem of restaurants with ingredients open open innovation platform;
innovation, recipe open innovation and service open innovation restaurant; ingredient open
to analyse open innovation in small restaurants, which is a innovation; recipe open
worldwide phenomenon. We chose four successful restaurants innovation; geographical
from Naples, one restaurant from South Korea, and a North economics
Korean restaurant as our case studies using participant
observation, in-depth interviews and semi-structured
questionnaires, with the results indicating the following. First,
open innovation is essential for the success of small restaurants.
Second, if any small restaurant adopts a closed innovation
strategy with respect to any of food ingredients, recipes or
service, it should choose an open innovation strategy or open
innovation platform with regard to the others to maintain its
competitive advantage compared to other restaurants in the
neighbourhood. Third, an open innovation platform of any of food
ingredients, recipes or service, can generate additional revenue by
selling independent ingredients or services.

1. Introduction: research question

Similar to other industries, food firms including restaurants rely on external scientific and
technological knowledge, customer knowledge or experiments to foster their own inno-
vation. However, firms in the food industry have several characteristics that distinguish
them from firms in other industries: (1) they operate in mature or low-technology
sectors; (2) food innovation is often initially developed in smaller companies or restau-
rants; (3) innovation in the food industry is normally incremental more than radical
and (4) patented food technologies are mainly introduced by a few multinational compa-
nies (Acosta, Coronado, & Ferrándiz, 2013). Although, for big food firms such as Lindt &
Sprüngli AG or Kraft Heinz, open innovation strategies belong to one category of several
candidates, for small restaurants or food firms, open innovation is a required strategy

CONTACT JinHyo Joseph Yun jhyun@dgist.ac.kr

© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 J. J. YUN ET AL.

(Fryer & Versteeg, 2008; Van de Vrande, De Jong, Vanhaverbeke, & De Rochemont,
2009). However, Lindt & Sprüngli AG, which is one of the top global chocolate manufac-
turers, adopted a ‘controlled open approach’ to exploit its potential benefits without radi-
cally modifying its business model and to maintain its key internal and private capabilities
(Lazzarotti & Manzini, 2013b). When Kraft Heinz developed melt-proof chocolate bars, it
pursued open innovation using well-constructed intermediary organization to accelerate
the innovation cycle (Wielens, 2013).
A critical issue, nowadays, is the need for innovation in restaurants, since they belong to
traditional sectors shaped by respect for the raw materials that express local identity, the
high human touch through the interaction between human resources and customers and
the sedimented knowledge of some chefs that combine local food with recipes passed
down through the generations (Ottenbacher & Harrington, 2009). However, we know
that there are differences between entrepreneurs who possess higher levels of indepen-
dence, tolerance of ambiguity, risk-taking propensity and innovativeness, and mere
small business owners who focus on marketing orientation and self-efficacy in the hospi-
tality industry including the restaurant sector (Wagener, Gorgievski, & Rijsdijk, 2010).
When we explore service businesses such as restaurants, the role of the customer in the
innovation process is not partial, but significant as a co-creator because there is a tension
between standardization, which makes providing the service more cost-effective for the
supplier; and customization, which matches the customer’s needs, but may require
different solutions for each customer (Chesbrough, 2010, p. 54). There are several
factors that affect the performance of entrepreneurial service firms such as successful res-
taurants (Lim, Ribeiro, & Lee, 2008). In the knowledge-based economy, knowledge advan-
tages of scale with ‘non-rivalrous knowledge’ can continue to accumulate endogenously,
promoting powerful economic growth, which drives open innovation in restaurant ser-
vices, as entrepreneurial orientation can also increase access to financial resources (Ches-
brough, 2010; Romer, 1986, 1990; Zampetakis, Vekini, & Moustakis, 2011).
We investigate the role of open innovation in the success of restaurants. Our research
questions are as follows:
Is open innovation the rational strategy for small restaurants to attract and maintain
customers?

Which open innovation strategies should a small restaurant use?

Our research object is the individual restaurant industry. Therefore, the franchisees’
trust, the relationship between franchisor and franchisee, or the franchise partner selection
problem of the franchise restaurant industry, etc., are beyond the scope of this paper
(Altinay & Brookes, 2012; Altinay, Brookes, Madanoglu, & Aktas, 2014; Brookes &
Altinay, 2011).

2. Literature review, hypothesis and research framework

2.1. Literature review and hypothesis
Consumer-driven food and beverage innovation, which develops products to meet consu-
mer needs, can succeed by making consumers participate in the innovation process
(Kemp, 2013). Consumer-centric company culture, such as maintaining good
 EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES 3

communication with respect to consumer issues, conducting customer research at all

stages of the new product development process and reaching data-based qualitative and
quantitative findings about customers, is essential for the success of innovation in food
firms or restaurants (Moskowitz, Beckley, & Resurreccion, 2012). Co-creation of value
with consumers as an innovation strategy in the food and beverage industry has
become popular in not only small firms, but also big ones such as in the case of
Molson Coors’ ‘talking can’ (Martinez, 2013a). Therefore, co-creation with consumers
offers the food and beverage industry an opportunity to add value and extricate themselves
from the commodity sectors where the lowest cost provider holds sway (Garcia Martinez,
Lazzarotti, Manzini, & Sánchez García, 2014). However, open innovation in the food and
beverage industry should be considered a type of organized innovation including internal
context, structure of collaboration and external context (Christensen, 2006).
In the food industry, vertical integration and networks play important roles in inno-
vation activities (Karantininis, Sauer, & Furtan, 2010). The vertical integrated collabor-
ators model corresponds to companies that only open their whole innovation funnel
to contributions coming from a few types of partners (typically, suppliers and/or custo-
mers) (Lazzarotti & Manzini, 2009). Although there is still limited empirical evidence
regarding open innovation strategies in the food industry, three different types of
open innovation models are identified, namely, (1) the sharing-is-winning model,
which is focused on start-ups and individual inventors, (2) the food-machinery frame-
work which focuses on the open food supply chain for the food-machinery firm, and
the Want, Find,Get, Manage (WFGM) model which is focused on the open food
supply chain among suppliers, food companies and consumers (Bigliardi & Galati,
2013). In addition, a growing number of chain actors, jointly, meeting the heterogeneous
needs of customers, end-users, seed firms, farmers, packers, retailers, technology suppli-
ers, legislators and so on, is driving the dynamics of open innovation in the food industry
to open up to external sources of knowledge in search of new successful products and
technologies (Sarkar & Costa, 2008).
Following the extant literature, we construct Figure 1 to answer the first research
question.
Hypothesis: Open innovation in restaurant in developing new ingredients, new menus or
new recipes, or new service will increase the revenue of the restaurant. Conversely, closed
innovation strategies in a restaurant will reduce its revenues.

However, if we explore the food industry from the perspective of sustainable food con-
sumption, consumers have become increasingly estranged from the production of their
food, and despite the recent recurrence of regional food and new trends like slow food
and organic products, consumer knowledge of seasonality and regional supply has with-
ered (Reisch, Eberle, & Lorek, 2013). Additionally, out-of home-consumption now
accounts for a significant and growing proportion of European food intake, simul-
taneously, food consumption is increasingly furnished with symbolic meanings and
hedonic experiences, and ‘social food’ has become ever more significant in combatting
the perils of an individualized society (Bes-Rastrollo et al., 2010; Reisch et al., 2013; Van-
devijvere, Lachat, Kolsteren, & Van Oyen, 2009).
4 J. J. YUN ET AL.

Figure 1. Hypothesis.

The success of Italy’s food industry and many Italian restaurants can be traced back to
the transfer of diverse and dynamic open innovations in food and agriculture industries
from Greece to Italy, from the Roman empire to First World War (Parasecoli, 2014). In
the service industry, including restaurants, market-based co-operation and use of
market-based information is positively related to the novelty of the innovation intro-
duced by the firm, whereas co-operation with competitors (co-opetition) is not positively
related to the novelty of the innovation introduced by the firm (Mention, 2011). More-
over, in the service industry, the higher the firm’s level of innovation success is, the more
intensive its recourse to cooperation with universities, or customer–provider technologi-
cal self-efficacy (Janeiro, Proença, & da Conceição Gonçalves, 2013; Suh & Kim, 2012).
Furthermore, the restaurant industry normally does not use universities as innovation
sources. At present, many new business models are motivated by culture and arts,
which have deep relationships with restaurants or foods (Schiuma & Lerro, 2017).
Even though many studies point out several potentially valuable sources of knowledge
such as customers, suppliers, competitors, universities, etc., in the firm’s environment,
customers have been identified as a particularly promising source of knowledge,
especially when their demand is a precursor of broader market segments (Sofka &
Grimpe, 2010; Von Hippel, 2005). More commonly, firms, including restaurants, play
a central role in creating and organizing innovation communities which are well orga-
nized with or without online platforms (West & Lakhani, 2008). We can enhance the
customer experience through a services value web in which there is an iterative
process that includes customer engagement, value co-creation, acquiring tacit knowledge,
designing experience points and service offering (Chesbrough, 2011). The cultural
aspects of food such as the aroma make us focus more on the customer experience
(James, 2004).
In fact, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) engage in many open innovation prac-
tices primarily for market-related motives such as meeting the customer demands, or
keeping up with competitors, and have increasingly adopted such practices recently,
 EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES 5

without any differences between the manufacturing and service industries with the arrival
of the fourth industrial revolution (Lee et al., 2018; Van de Vrande et al., 2009). In Chez
Panisse, which was chosen as the best restaurant in the US by Gourmet magazine in 2001,
as one of the top 50 restaurants in the world by Restaurant magazine from 2002 to 2008,
and awarded the Michelin star which the restaurant lost in 2010, the hallmark of fine
dining, throughout its history, Alice Waters, its founder and owner, and her team have
built a local, and now, a global ecosystem using an ‘open innovation’ strategy with stake-
holders such as suppliers, alumni chefs and staff, food writers and most customers (Ches-
brough, Kim, & Agogino, 2014). In particular, they introduced the open kitchen concept,
global top special menus and recipes, and invented menus for individual customers; for
example ‘the menu for Celilia for her ninetieth birthday’, in addition to building relation-
ships with suppliers and farmers, enhancing the relationships with customers through the
chef alumni system and the Chez Panisse Foundation, and collaboration with food edu-
cators (Chesbrough et al., 2014). In the 1970s, Alice Waters established the open inno-
vation ecosystem of Chez Panisse (Waters, 2009). All the points in the restaurant
experience, such as (1) make a reservation; (2) arrive at the restaurant; (3) ask for a
table; (4) go to the table; (5) receive the menu; (6) order drinks and food; (7) eat; (8)
order the bill; (9) pay; (10) visit the restroom and (11) leave, are parts of formulating a
service open innovation strategy (Chesbrough, 2010, p. 59). Service open innovation strat-
egies for the food and beverage service business can be derived from the interaction with
customers in terms of several values such as the appealing value (e.g. the restaurant image),
reflective value (e.g. character of the space) or social responsibility value (e.g. the social
message of visible materials) (Nam, Kim, & Carnie, 2018).
The objective of consumer-driven innovation is to create the right process or appli-
cation to fulfil consumer needs and expectations because consumers themselves are a
core part of innovation in the food and beverage industry (Kemp, 2013; Tüzünkan &
Albayrak, 2015). In other words, the co-creation of value with consumers as an innovation
strategy in the fast-paced or turbulent markets or industries, such as the food and beverage
industry, is essential because co-operating with the so-called lead users has been described
as an important source of innovation for firms (Martinez, 2013a; Von Hippel, 2005). Evi-
dently, co-creation of innovation, according to an open innovation perspective, requires
developing a common language, adopting different approaches with novice and expert
customers, and establishing different channels for communication because the restaurant
industry is characterized by high human touch; thus a deep level of human-to-human
interaction is required (Desouza et al., 2008). Similar to long-term co-innovation partner-
ships, open innovation in the restaurant business considers the key factors in all phases
such as initiation, partner selection, formation, implementation and evaluation (Tepic,
Omta, Fortuin, & Saris, 2013). Moreover, similar to the global open innovation structure
of Mars Inc., which can be diverse according to food, chocolate, drinks, petcare, gum and
sugar, or the Kraft Heinz open innovation framework, open innovation strategies in the
restaurant need to be diverse (Lazzarotti & Manzini, 2013a; Martinez, 2013c). Models
of adoption of open innovation within the food and beverage or restaurant industries
are diverse with many elements from suppliers of food ingredients, menus, and, recipes,
to dynamic and specific service industry (Bigliardi & Galati, 2013; Garcia Martinez
et al., 2014; Martinez, 2013b).
6 J. J. YUN ET AL.

2.2. Research framework for the analysis of open innovation in the restaurant
business
According to the literature on food and beverage, open innovation in restaurants occurs in
food ingredients, menu recipes or restaurant services in diverse levels such as closed inno-
vation by the restaurants themselves, open innovation by mainly co-operating with the
customers or an open innovation platform, which is a type of an open innovation organ-
ization as shown in Figure 2.
Food ingredient open innovation could be measured from the customer satisfaction or
restaurant high ranking which is motivated by increasing the number of ingredients and
the freshness of ingredients in our interviews. Second, menu recipe open innovation could
be measured from the customer satisfaction or restaurant high ranking which is motivated
by increasing the number of new menus themselves and the fascinating menus according
to our interviews. Last, restaurant service open innovation could be measured from the
customer satisfaction or restaurant high ranking which is motivated by customized and
sophisticated service which were found during our interviews.
Although there are other important factors to consider such as the budgeting and
control system or the management system of the mostly individual and family-owned res-
taurants, we focus on open innovation in restaurants in this paper (Ahrens & Chapman,
2004; Ozdemir & Caliskan, 2014).
Therefore, we analyse open innovation of target restaurants using this framework of
food ingredients, menu recipes and restaurant services. By analysing the open innovation
in restaurants, we shall answer the hypothesis and research questions.

2.3 Research methods and scope

We analyse the open innovation of target restaurants chosen as case studies through in-
depth interviews using semi-structured questionnaires as shown in Table 1, as well as par-
ticipant observation. We interviewed mainly chiefs, or managing directors, as our ques-
tionnaire is designed for them to answer. Intensive interviewing is very useful for
conceptual mapping of open innovation in restaurants (Hochschild, 2009), as one key
condition for a good qualitative research is that the researcher should begin with a

Figure 2. Research framework for the analysis of open innovation in the restaurant business.
 EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES 7

Table 1. A semi-structured questionnaire for in-depth interviews with restaurateurs.

Quantitative answer
Closed innovation open
innovation
Number Qualitative answer 1 2 3 4 5
1 How does your restaurant develop new menus and recipes? ( )
2 How does your restaurant develop new ingredients? ( )
3 How does your restaurant develop new services? ( )
4 Would you please introduce one example of innovation in your restaurant? ( )

single or simple focus or concept being explored such as the research framework of open
innovation in restaurants shown in Figure 2 (Creswell & Poth, 2017, p. 48). A semi-struc-
tured questionnaire is a research method that mixes the interview and questionnaire
methods (Harris & Brown, 2010), thus achieving a higher validity than the unstructured
approach (Joffe, 1992). In addition, we used participant observation to explore the open
innovation realities of restaurants (Clark, Holland, Katz, & Peace, 2009; Nelson &
Wright, 1995).
We stayed at the restaurants for 1–2 h as customers to conduct participant observation
of these restaurants before the interviews. Sometimes during these participant obser-
vations, we asked the customers, chefs or service managers of the restaurant using our
semi-structured questionnaire.
We selected restaurants that are evaluated as very successful by customers and them-
selves at their respective regions. Then, we selected three different groups of restaurants
which have more than two times more customers compared to the neighbourhood’s
similar size restaurants. First, we selected four restaurants in Naples, Sorento and Capri
in Italy. Second, we selected one South Korean sushi restaurant, the Gampo sushi restau-
rant, among 12 sushi restaurants at Gampo sushi restaurants town in Gyeongju, South
Korea. Third, we selected one North Korean restaurant, the Pyongyang traditional cold
noodle restaurant in Phnom Penh, Cambodia among four North Korea restaurants in
the city.

3. Open innovation in Naples restaurants

First, we interviewed the first chef, Gaetano Boatelli, at Ristorante Barbarrossa (A) at
Capri from 2 to 4 pm on 26th October 2018. New menus or recipes are being developed
to meet the diverse customer demands from all over the world all the year. Thus, there is
a moderate level of open innovation in menus and recipes (OIR). Additionally, all ingre-
dients such as sea food, fruits and so on, are changed every season according to the pro-
duction from the Capri Island and other areas near Naples and the requirements of
customers, thus demonstrating a high level of open innovation in food ingredients at
this restaurant. The table carton in this restaurant is changed whenever a new customer
takes a seat, with employees checking several times the customer satisfaction level with
food when serving it. Then the managing director is given the feedback about the cus-
tomers’ opinions directly. The employees change the service contents nearly every day
according to the customers’ requirements; for example, decoration of the tables,
serving of breed, etc. The chef reported that they are trying to meet the customers’
demands at the top global levels at every moment. Therefore, the restaurant has a
8 J. J. YUN ET AL.

high level of open innovation in service (OIS) through the intimate interaction with cus-
tomers as shown in Figure 3.
Second, we interviewed the chef, Fabio Cirillo at Hotel Elisabetta restaurant (B) at Via
Pozzano, 18, 80053 Castellammare di Stabia, Italy between 8 and 10 pm on 26th October
2018. He started his career as a cook when he was 24 years old, he was 38 at the time of
interview, working 15 years in the kitchen. He worked as an executive chief of Gordon
Ramsey restaurants at Forte village, then became the first chief at B. At the restaurant,
every day the menus and recipes are changed. He tries to ask what the customer ate the
day before when he receives order or before cooking. Then, he always inquires indirectly
about the customer’s taste of food of his customer. Through this process, he develops a
very creative and specific menu or recipe, which meets the taste of the customer.
During or after eating, he asks the customer about his/her satisfaction level with the
food, and develops a new concrete menu or recipe, or changes the old menu to a new
style. The open innovation level in recipe in B was also very high as shown in Figure 3,
with most of its food ingredients coming from the farm, which is located behind the
hotel with a distance of one acre. The chef of B takes the seasonal vegetables every day
from the hotel farm. However, if customers require other ingredients such as carruba,
which is not cultivated at the farm, he orders it from near farm, and tries to grow the ingre-
dient at the hotel farm. Additionally, he makes red and white wine by himself according to
the customers’ demands from the hotel farm grapes, as he preserves the bottles at the hotel
farm winery, and happily serves them when the customer order wine. He normally uses
turkey, beef or seafood ingredients from near Naples farms or producers’ union because
he can trust the quality of food ingredients. When the chef receives an order from a cus-
tomer in advance, he asks about the preference of the customer regarding the food ingre-
dients, and then chooses them to meet the customer requirements. Chef, Fabio Cirillo,
adopts a very high-level open innovation strategy in food ingredient by following the
taste of customers, succeeding in diversifying the food ingredients. Customers of the Eli-
zabes hotel are not only from Sorrento or Naples in Italy but also from many countries
such as Germany, France or Korea because of the fantastic view at which the tourist
can see all the seaside of Sorrento and the very diverse food and food ingredients. In
addition, this small restaurant can host diverse parties such as wedding parties, family
parties, local community parties or academic meeting, collaborating with flower

Figure 3. Locations of the four Italian restaurants in the open innovation ecosystem.
 EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES 9

decoration companies, and actively restructuring tables. According to the direct or indirect
requirements of customers, the table structure, flower decoration, food menu at the restau-
rant are changed every morning. We could have enjoyed open innovation in the restaurant
service which was extremely dynamic and high as seen in Figure 3.
Third, we interviewed Raffaele Di Maio (D), the manager of hotel Miramare restaurant
(C) between 1 and 3 pm on 27th October 2018. C was trying to develop a new menu or
recipe which could offer implications to customers in addition to meeting their individual
requirements. By asking the customers directly about their satisfaction level with the
served food, and providing a feedback to the chefs, the restaurant succeeded in several
detail differentiations of the same menu item such as pasta, being a representative
example of an extremely high open innovation in recipe as illustrated in Figure 3.
Additionally, the restaurant uses all ingredients from Naples because the chef grew up
at Naples, knowing nearly all great food ingredients and understanding all the seasonal
ingredients from Naples. Moreover, the chef tried to mix diverse ingredients from
Naples to meet the new requirements of global customers, creating several inventions
and promoting new open innovation in food in the restaurant. For example, the mixing
of seafood and mustard resulted in a new innovative food with a positive feedback
from customers. C has a high level of open innovation in ingredients due to the chef
who was born in Naples as shown in Figure 3. Through enjoying diverse exhibitions
and painting galleries, in addition to meeting very strange and diverse requirements
and comments from Italian and global customers, the creative and fantastic decorations
of this restaurant were possible; for example, a siting and sleeping chair, real-tree style dec-
orations, a glass wall between the beach and the restaurant, or a beach chair made of wood
at the veranda. Dishes, cups, table covers and food dishes were all constructed according to
books, conferences and global customers’ taste. The manager reported ‘We do not provide
water, but the service which provides the water while stimulating the emotion of custo-
mers’. Therefore, this restaurant implemented a very high open innovation strategy in res-
taurant service through diverse channels, not just customers.
Fourth, we interviewed the managing director of Le Bistort Bordeaux (D) at the down-
town of the Naples between 6:30 and 8:30 pm on 27th October 2018. The restaurant
employees have always paid attention to customers, surrounding environment and the
changing trends of market. According to the manager, if we pay attention to the changing
taste of customers, and the changing situation of market, we can make new menus and
recipes successfully, for example Fili di neve, or Spaghetti with potatoes, garlic, oil and
pepper. Even the restaurant in downtown also pursued the normal open innovation in
recipe as demonstrated in Figure 3. In this restaurant, the main food ingredients used
were seasonal ingredients from Naples and near areas. The principle of food ingredients
of D was ‘The natural ingredients should be used at the nature’. For example, Raffaello,
which is a red and small radish, could be eaten deliciously just with salt and olive. This
downtown restaurant has tried to implement an open innovation strategy in food ingre-
dients despite the poor location as shown in Figure 3 by paying attention to the momen-
tary requirements of customers at the restaurant. In addition, they have always tried to
catch the related markets trends of dishes, tables, and covers to update and innovate
the restaurant service, and to communicate with customers and people located on the
value-chain to achieve a high level of open innovation in restaurant service.
10 J. J. YUN ET AL.

As shown in Figure 3, even though there were differences among the restaurants, all
successful restaurants of Italy adopted joint open innovation strategies in ingredients,
recipes and service. The successful restaurants in Naples, Italy, showed representative
methods and examples of open innovation in food ingredients, menu recipes, and res-
taurant service, which are listed in Appendix 1 according to our participant
observation.

4. Open innovation in the Gampo sushi restaurant in Gyeongju, South

Korea
We visited this restaurant seven times between January 2013 and December 2014, finding
the special open innovation platform. Additionally, we conducted participant observation
at the restaurant and interviewed Hejin Park, the managing director and president of this
restaurant four times on 9th November 2018, 4th, 5th and 12th January 2019.
The Gampo sushi restaurant has more than five times more customers than the other
12 sushi restaurants in the same region. The characteristic factor of this restaurant is the
open innovation platform structure of ingredients as shown in Figure 4. In the case of the
main dish, sushi, the restaurant provides diverse ingredients of sushi in three steps. First, it
provides six ingredients such as Semiyuk, Trunk of Sea Tangle, Fermented Kimchi, Gor-
iragi, GochuJangachi and Toasted Mackerel pike which are obtained from areas near the
restaurant with two base food ingredients, i.e. laver and lettuce. At this step, customer
enjoys diverse sushi, i.e. 3 (Laver, Laver + Lettuce, Lettuce) × 26 = 192 ways. At the
second step, the customer can enjoy more diverse ways, namely, 192 ways × 3 (Vegetables
Mix, Raw Fish and Vegetables mix with raw fish). At the third step, the customer can enjoy
diverse sushi recipes. All ingredients at the first step are obtained from seasonal ingredi-
ents from near locations and could be changed according to the customers’ requirements.
The second step ingredients are also changed according to the available seafood and veg-
etables near the location, in addition to the customers’ special requirements. Moreover, the
subcomponents of the rice with vinegar recipe at the third step can be changed according
to the customer requirements.

Figure 4. The open innovation platform structure of ingredients in Gampo sushi restaurant.
 EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES 11

The open innovation platform of ingredients in the Gampo sushi restaurant gave
chances for the restaurant to sell ingredients like laver, Semiyuk, trunk of sea tangle,
salted and fermented fish, seafood and other products, in addition to the selling of
other side-dish ingredients such as sweet rice drink, braised sole, salted seafood, as
shown in Appendix 2. At present, the portions of selling these ingredients are rapidly
increasing. To summarize, the Gampo restaurant established an open innovation platform
of ingredients and developed steps to sell ingredients separate from sushi, which is the
main dish of this restaurant, as illustrated in Figure 5 and Appendix 2.
The first chef of this restaurant was the mother of its president, while another chef is the
president of the restaurant, HaeJin Park, with the last chef being Ahn who has worked at
Korean Sushi restaurants for a long time. All menus and recipes were developed by the
president and her mother. In addition, this restaurant developed new menus such as
Junbok-Juk or roasted rockfish. However, it does not have a feedback system from custo-
mer to chef through the serving manager; thus, the menus and recipes of the Gampo sushi
restaurant are almost a closed innovation (Figure 5).
The Gampo restaurant communicates in three phases when selling sushi to each cus-
tomer group by introducing the method of first-step platforms, second-step platforms and
third-step platform. By communicating with customers during the serving process, this
restaurant receives new ideas about ingredients such as the ingredients physical platforms
or changing of ingredients. Furthermore, during the serving process, they set up a sleeping
accommodation system to meet the requirements of customers who want to spend the
night at Gampo, then eat the next morning at the restaurant. Moreover, during the
serving, the restaurant sends the packaged ingredients to the customers’ houses through
an express distribution system so that customers can receive them when they are back
home. Following this process, the Gampo sushi restaurant implements an open innovation
strategy in service (Figure 5).

Figure 5. The open innovation ecosystem of the Gampo sushi restaurant.

12 J. J. YUN ET AL.

The Gampo restaurant has established an open innovation platform for food ingredi-
ents, promoting the selling of packaged ingredients, since some customers who used the
platform want to experience it at their homes by buying some ingredients.
Therefore, the closed innovation in this restaurant is covered by the open innovation in
service and its feedback to the open innovation platform of ingredients. In addition, the
closed innovation in the menus and recipes in this restaurant because of the veteran
chefs of seafood motivate the creation of additional menus for customers who do not
enjoy seafood sushi.

5. Open innovation in the North Korean Pyongyang traditional cold

noodle restaurant in Phnom Penh, Cambodia
We conducted participant observation at the Pyongyang traditional cold noodle restaurant
in Phnom Penh, Cambodia on 11th, 14th, 18th and 21st December 2018 in addition to
interviewing employees at the restaurant.
First, we investigated its open innovation platform of performances which have been its
competitive advantages compared to other North Korean, Chinese, Western, South
Korean restaurants in Phnom Penh. In the restaurant, there are 14 serving employees
who serve and do performance simultaneously. The restaurant has 18 performance
modules, which are composed of 6 dancing modules, 8 musical instrument-playing
modules and 4 singing modules. Among the 18 modules, the restaurant puts on 11 per-
formances which are new combinations of the original 18 modules as illustrated in
Figure 6. For example, one performance on 18th December 2018 consisted of 3 singing
and dancing with 6 musical instrument-playing modules. The performing employees
receive feedback from customers during serving such as a new performance combination
requirement or a new song which is popular now in the US and China. The 14 performing

Figure 6. Open innovation platform for performance service in the Pyongyang traditional cold needle
restaurant.
 EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES 13

employees update the 18 modules according to the feedback from customers and the inner
opinions of 3 module groups. In addition, they perform the 11 new performances which
are new combinations of the original 18 modules based on the customer composition of
the day, or the customer feedback the day before.
The performance in this restaurant is executed in the evening for nearly a maximum of
1 h. Therefore, the dinner service in this restaurant looks like a type of performance
because all serving employees are simultaneously doing performance and serving, chan-
ging their clothes between three to four times.
The diverse performance contents are serviced to the restaurant customers first, then to
the performance-specialized customers at the performance-oriented rooms after the main
performance (Figure 7). Thus the open innovation platform of service is being sold inde-
pendently from the main customers in this restaurant whose situation is similar to the
Gampo restaurant.
Second, the menus or recipes of this restaurant are changed, at least, according to
seasons, with the maximum being every month according to the customers’ requirements
such as a new menu of North Korean food for South Korean customers or a new menu of
Chinese food for Chinese customers (Figure 7). Hence, this restaurant changes, adds and
deletes new menus dramatically according to the fluctuating requirements from custo-
mers. At present, the restaurant is adding new menus and recipes to meet the require-
ments from increasing Cambodian customers. In preparing alcoholic beverages, this
restaurant tries to meet the changing requirements of customers; for example it prepares
a wine type which was popular in South Korea when many South Korean customers came.
In addition, they prepare South Korean traditional alcoholic beverages, such as Makkolli,
raw rice wine, which has Seoul mark. Thus the Pyongyang traditional cold noodle restau-
rant implements a high open innovation strategy in menus and recipes.
Third, regarding the food ingredients, the restaurant adopts a closed innovation strat-
egy, by which it obtains food ingredients from Cambodian providers without other
requirements except receiving powdered red pepper directly from North Korea. Although

Figure 7. The open innovation ecosystem of the Pyongyang traditional cold noodle restaurant.
14 J. J. YUN ET AL.

many food ingredients were imported from North Korea until 5–6 years ago, currently,
most of the food ingredients come from fixed Cambodian providers (Figure 7).
As shown in Figure 7, the Pyongyang traditional cold noodle restaurant in Phnom Penh
has established an open innovation platform for service that has additional independent
customers. Additionally, although the restaurant implements an open innovation in
menus and recipes, it adopts closed innovation in food ingredients now.

6. Discussion and conclusion

6.1. Discussion: causal restaurant business model; two steps of open innovation
There are two steps in open innovation (OI) in the restaurant business model (BM) as
illustrated in Figure 8. We can find two steps of OI, such as OI itself and open innovation
platform (OIP), from the successful cases of restaurant businesses. The first step is open
innovation itself, as it creates ‘customer and market information’ and promotes communi-
cations with customers, suppliers and other collaborators. These communications give
‘customer and market information’, which reinforces ingredient, recipe and service cre-
ation through the reinforcing loop of (R-OI) as follows: open innovation → customer
and market information → ingredient, recipe and service creation → customer value cre-
ation → open innovation.
The second and more advanced step is the open innovation platform, which creates
‘combinative innovation and customer self-creation’. The platform enables the combi-
nation creation, and from the combinations, many innovations can occur. Additionally,

Figure 8. Causal loop model of restaurant open innovation.

 EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES 15

customers can make their own trials and creations themselves through the platform. This
combinative innovation and customer self-creation motivate the second-step customers
such as in the independent ingredient selling at the Gampo restaurant, or the performance
second-step customers at the Pyongyang restaurant. The open innovation platform of
recipes or menus produces additional revenue by independent products or services such
as opening a cooking school, publishing a food or restaurant journal, or selling menus
or other sources in successful big restaurants such as Chez Panisse; however, we did
not find out the evidence by ourselves (Chesbrough et al., 2014). ‘combinative innovation
and customer self-creation’ reinforce ingredient, recipe and service creation through the
reinforcing loop of (R-POI) as follows: open innovation → open innovation platform
→ combinative innovation and customer self-creation → ingredient, recipe and service
creation → customer value creation → open innovation.
Therefore, the open innovation platform will be the new cash cow of restaurants in
addition to providing the restaurants with competitive advantages compared to closed
innovation or open innovation oriented restaurants.

6.2. Implications
This study investigates the open innovation ecosystem of successful restaurants based on
the case studies of four successful restaurants in Naples, Italy, one South Korean sushi res-
taurant in Gyungju, South Korea, and one North Korean restaurant in Phnom Penh, Cam-
bodia, using a research framework consisting of three components, namely, food
ingredients, menus and recipes, and service.
According to these case studies, first, open innovation in restaurants is essential to the
sustainable development of any restaurant.
Second, closed innovation in any component of the open innovation ecosystem should
be covered by open innovation or open innovation platform with respect to other com-
ponents to attract more customers than the other restaurants in the same region.
Third, an open innovation platform of ingredients, menus and recipes, and service can
produce additional independent products or customer groups. Therefore, it should be
established, developed, and maintained.
Fourth, this paper contributes to the current literature, since it deepens the streams of
research on closed innovation and open innovation platform, which are understudied.
Additionally, the overlapping approaches to open innovation, open innovation platform
and closed innovation allow us to have a more comprehensive view on the concept of res-
taurant innovation.
Fifth, this paper also constitutes an important base for managerial implications. Evi-
dently, the application of this precise theoretical framework in the restaurant industry
can help restaurants create both economic value and customer value by implementing
an open innovation strategy within their ecosystems.

6.3. Future research

This study focuses on successful restaurants; however, we need to further investigate
failure and success cases in the open innovation ecosystem simultaneously to find out
additional factors that affect the ecosystem.
16 J. J. YUN ET AL.

In addition, we need to study the differences between the open innovation ecosystems
of restaurants based on the cultural differences. The food industry, including restaurants,
is treated as a culture-sensitive industry (Han & Ryu, 2009; Ryu, Han, & Jang, 2010). Thus
the differences between open innovation ecosystems according to different cultures in
Europe, Asia, the Americas, Africa, etc., should be further studied.
Since the novelty of this paper is exploring the perspective of chefs and managers,
future research can further study other human resources at the organizational level.
Last, open innovation platform of menus or recipes in small restaurants could also be
an additional research topic. Futures studies can explore the possibility of additional inde-
pendent products or services from open innovation platforms in menus and services of
small restaurants.

Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the DGIST R&D Program 2019-IT of the Ministry of Science and ICT
(19-SC-01) Nothing.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

References
Acosta, M., Coronado, D., & Ferrándiz, E. (2013). Trends in the acquisition of external knowledge
for innovation in the food industry. In M. G. Martinez (Ed.), Open innovation in the food and
beverage industry (pp. 3–24). London: Woodhead Publishing.
Ahrens, T., & Chapman, C. (2004). Accounting for flexibility and efficiency: A field study of man-
agement control systems in a restaurant chain. Contemporary Accounting Research, 21(2), 271–
301. doi:10.1506/VJR6-RP75-7GUX-XH0X
Altinay, L., & Brookes, M. (2012). Factors influencing relationship development in franchise part-
nerships. Journal of Services Marketing, 26(4), 278–292. doi:10.1108/08876041211237578
Altinay, L., Brookes, M., Madanoglu, M., & Aktas, G. (2014). Franchisees’ trust in and satisfaction
with franchise partnerships. Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 722–728. doi:10.1016/j.jbustres.
2013.11.034
Bes-Rastrollo, M., Basterra-Gortari, F.., Sanchez-Villegas, A., Marti, A., Martínez, J., & Martínez-
González, M. (2010). A prospective study of eating away-from-home meals and weight gain
in a Mediterranean population: The SUN (Seguimiento Universidad de Navarra) cohort.
Public Health Nutrition, 13(9), 1356–1363. doi:10.1017/s1368980009992783
Bigliardi, B., & Galati, F. (2013). Models of adoption of open innovation within the food industry.
Trends in Food Science & Technology, 30(1), 16–26. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2012.11.001
Brookes, M., & Altinay, L. (2011). Franchise partner selection: Perspectives of franchisors and fran-
chisees. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(5), 336–348. doi:10.1108/08876041111149694
Chesbrough, H. (2010). Open services innovation: Rethinking your business to grow and compete in a
new era. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
Chesbrough, H., Kim, S., & Agogino, A. (2014). Chez Panisse: Building an open innovation ecosys-
tem. California Management Review, 56(4), 144–171. doi:10.1525/cmr.2014.56.4.144
Chesbrough, H. (2011). Bringing open innovation to services. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52
(2), 85. doi:10.5437/08953608
Christensen, J. (2006). Wither core competency for the large corporation in an open innovation
world. In Open innovation: Researching a new paradigm (pp. 35–61).
 EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES 17

Clark, A., Holland, C., Katz, J., & Peace, S. (2009). Learning to see: Lessons from a participatory
observation research project in public spaces. International Journal of Social Research
Methodology, 12(4), 345–360. doi:10.1080/13645570802268587
Creswell, J., & Poth, C. (2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. Sage Publications.
Desouza, K., Awazu, Y., Jha, S., Dombrowski, C., Papagari, S., Baloh, P., & Kim, J. (2008).
Customer-driven innovation. Research-Technology Management, 51(3), 35–44. doi:10.1080/
08956308.2008.11657503
Fryer, P., & Versteeg, C. (2008). Processing technology innovation in the food industry. Innovation,
10(1), 74–90. doi:10.5172/impp.453.10.74
Garcia Martinez, M., Lazzarotti, V., Manzini, R., & Sánchez García, M. (2014). Open innovation strat-
egies in the food and drink industry: Determinants and impact on innovation performance.
International Journal of Technology Management, 66(2–3), 212–242. doi:10.1504/ijtm.2014.064588
Han, H., & Ryu, K. (2009). The roles of the physical environment, price perception, and customer
satisfaction in determining customer loyalty in the restaurant industry. Journal of Hospitality &
Tourism Research, 33(4), 487–510. doi:10.1177/1096348009344212
Harris, L., & Brown, G. (2010). Mixing interview and questionnaire methods: Practical problems in
aligning data Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 15, 1–19.
Hochschild, J. (2009). Conducting intensive interviews and elite interviews. Paper presented at the
Workshop on interdisciplinary standards for systematic qualitative research. Washington, DC:
National Science Foundation. Retrieved October, 2011, from http://scholar.harvard.edu/
jlhochschild/publications/conducting-intensive-interviews-and-elite-interviews.
James, R. (2004). The reliable beauty of aroma: Staples of food and cultural production among
Italian-Australians 1. The Australian Journal of Anthropology, 15(1), 23–39. doi:10.1111/j.
1885-9310.2004.tb00363.x
Janeiro, P., Proença, I., & da Conceição Gonçalves, V. (2013). Open Innovation: Factors Explaining
Universities as Service Firm Innovation Sources, 66(10), 2017–2023. doi:10.1016/j.jbustres.2013.
02.027
Joffe, M. (1992). Validity of exposure data derived from a structured questionnaire. American
Journal of Epidemiology, 135(5), 564–570. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116323
Karantininis, K., Sauer, J., & Furtan, W. (2010). Innovation and integration in the agri-food indus-
try. Food Policy, 35(2), 112–120. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2009.10.003
Kemp, S. (2013). Consumers as part of food and beverage industry innovation. In Open innovation
in the food and beverage industry (pp. 109–138). Elsevier.
Lazzarotti, V., & Manzini, R. (2009). Different modes of open innovation: A theoretical framework
and an empirical study. International Journal of Innovation Management, 13(04), 615–636.
doi:10.1142/s1363919609002443
Lazzarotti, V., & Manzini, R. (2013a). Effective organizational and managerial company frame-
works to support open innovation: Overview and the case of Heinz. In Open innovation in
the food and beverage industry (pp. 356–368). Elsevier.
Lazzarotti, V., & Manzini, R. (2013b). The tension between traditional innovation strategies and
openness: Lindt’s controlled open innovation approach. In Open innovation in the food and bev-
erage industry (pp. 25–38).
Lee, M., Yun, J., Pyka, A., Won, D., Kodama, F., Schiuma, G., … Jung, K. (2018). How to respond to
the fourth industrial revolution, or the second information technology revolution? Dynamic new
combinations between technology, market, and society through open innovation. Journal of
Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 4(3), 21. doi:10.3390/joitmc4030021
Lim, S., Ribeiro, D., & Lee, S. (2008). Factors affecting the performance of entrepreneurial service
firms. The Service Industries Journal, 28(7), 1003–1013. doi:10.1080/02642060701867263
Martinez, M. (2013a). Co-creation of value with consumers as an innovation strategy in the food
and beverage industry: The case of Molson Coors’‘talking can’. In Open innovation in the food
and beverage industry (pp. 139–153). Sawston, Cambridge: Elsevier.
Martinez, M. (2013b). Open innovation in the food and beverage industry. Sawston, Cambridge:
Elsevier.
18 J. J. YUN ET AL.

Martinez, M. (2013c). The ‘want find get manage’ (WFGM) framework for open-innovation man-
agement and its use by Mars, Incorporated. In Open innovation in the food and beverage industry
(pp. 315–331). Sawston, Cambridge: Elsevier.
Mention, A. (2011). Co-operation and co-opetition as open innovation practices in the service
sector: Which influence on innovation novelty? Technovation, 31(1), 44–53. doi:10.1016/j.
technovation.2010.08.002
Moskowitz, H., Beckley, J., & Resurreccion, A. (2012). Sensory and consumer research in food
product design and development. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Nam, K., Kim, B., & Carnie, B. (2018). Service open innovation; Design elements for the food and
beverage service business. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 4(4),
53. doi:10.3390/joitmc4040053
Nelson, N., & Wright, S. (1995). Power and participatory development. London: Intermediate
Technology.
Ottenbacher, M., & Harrington, R. (2009). The product innovation process of quick-service restau-
rant chains. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 21(5), 523–541.
doi:10.1108/09596110910967782
Ozdemir, B., & Caliskan, O. (2014). A review of literature on restaurant menus: Specifying the man-
agerial issues. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 2(1), 3–13. doi:10.1016/j.
ijgfs.2013.12.001
Parasecoli, F. (2014). Al dente: A history of food in Italy. Reaktion Books.
Reisch, L., Eberle, U., & Lorek, S. (2013). Sustainable food consumption: An overview of contem-
porary issues and policies. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 9(2), 7–25. doi:10.1080/
15487733.2013.11908111
Romer, P. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94(5),
1002–1037. doi:10.1086/261420
Romer, P. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5, Part 2),
S71–S102. doi:10.1086/261725
Ryu, K., Han, H., & Jang, S. (2010). Relationships among hedonic and utilitarian values, satisfaction
and behavioral intentions in the fast-casual restaurant industry. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(3), 416–432. doi:10.1108/09596111011035981
Sarkar, S., & Costa, A. (2008). Dynamics of open innovation in the food industry. Trends in Food
Science & Technology, 19(11), 574–580. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2008.09.006
Schiuma, G., & Lerro, A. (2017). The business model prism: Managing and innovating business
models of arts and cultural organisations. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market,
and Complexity, 3(1), 13. doi:10.1186/s40852-017-0066-z
Sofka, W., & Grimpe, C. (2010). Specialized search and innovation performance–evidence across
Europe. R&D Management, 40(3), 310–323. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2010.00592.x
Suh, Y., & Kim, M. (2012). Effects of SME collaboration on R&D in the service sector in open inno-
vation. Innovation, 14(3), 349–362. doi:10.5172/impp.2012.14.3.349
Tepic, M., Omta, S., Fortuin, F., & Saris, A. (2013). Managing co-innovation partnerships: The case
of Unilever and its preferred flavour suppliers. In Open innovation in the food and beverage
industry (pp. 254–275). Elsevier.
Tüzünkan, D., & Albayrak, A. (2015). Research about Moleculer Cuisine application As An inno-
vation example In Istanbul restaurants. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, 446–452.
Van de Vrande, V., De Jong, J., Vanhaverbeke, W., & De Rochemont, M. (2009). Open innovation
in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation, 29(6), 423–437. doi:10.
1016/j.technovation.2008.10.001
Vandevijvere, S., Lachat, C., Kolsteren, P., & Van Oyen, H. (2009). Eating out of home in Belgium:
Current situation and policy implications. British Journal of Nutrition, 102(6), 921–928. doi:10.
1017/s0007114509311745
Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. MIT Press.
Wagener, S., Gorgievski, M., & Rijsdijk, S. (2010). Businessman or host? Individual differences
between entrepreneurs and small business owners in the hospitality industry. The Service
Industries Journal, 30(9), 1513–1527. doi:10.1080/02642060802624324
 EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES 19

Waters, A. (2009). Relentless idealism for tough times A conversation with renowned restaurateur
Alice Waters. Watertown, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.
West, J., & Lakhani, K. (2008). Getting clear about communities in open innovation. Industry and
Innovation, 15(2), 223–231. doi:10.1080/13662710802033734
Wielens, R. (2013). Accelerating the innovation cycle through intermediation: The case of Kraft’s
melt-proof chocolate bars. In Open innovation in the food and beverage industry (pp. 63–73).
Elsevier.
Zampetakis, L., Vekini, M., & Moustakis, V. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation, access to financial
resources, and product performance in the Greek commercial TV industry. The Service Industries
Journal, 31(6), 897–910. doi:10.1080/02642060902960800

Appendices

Appendix 1. Open innovation ecosystem realities of restaurants in Italy.

Category of open
innovation Contents
Ingredients Use seasonal food ingredients
Prepare food ingredients in advance according to the food orders according to the special
requirements from customers
Establish restaurant farms and grow food ingredients, which can be used at the restaurant
Harvest food ingredients on the morning of the order day by the chef himself/herself if
possible
Form collaborative networks with trustable firms like production unions when buying food
ingredients
Menu or recipe Ask the customer what he or she ate the day before when taking the order
Ask two or more times if they are satisfied with the food or if they need an additional
requirement, and give the feedback directly to the chef
Offer special recipes according to customers from the same menu such as different types of
pasta noodles
Do not hesitate to prepare a new menu, if the customer orders in advance
Service Collaborate with the florists or flower shops to prepare for special events at the restaurant
Do not hesitate to change the tables’ structure every morning according to special customers
of the day
Keep up with international trends in furniture, paintings, colours, ceramic wares by attending
international conferences, global art museum exhibitions and reading global journals or
recent related books
Change the tablecloth according to every customer group
Keep in mind that the service is an essential part of the restaurant experience
Ensure that the service jobs in the restaurant are full-time or lead to a chef career course
20 J. J. YUN ET AL.

Appendix 2. Ingredients used in the Gampo sushi restaurant.